Campaigns Wikia:IRC Arbitration Board Discussion
This discussion took place on November 25th, 2006. * Now talking in #campaigns * Wikizach has joined #campaigns * anyone else show up? * Anyone here * yes * Hello * yup * So, just us * Do you think the Arbitration board will pass * Yes, I do. * Would you "run" for it * I actually think it will help calm things down a bit. We need to stop producing policies and focus on content. * I'm voting against it * And get more people * Why * I'm the lead admin, so I'm not eligible. * yes you are * Yes, getting more people involved is important. That's why I'm focused on Outreach. * I'm not stepping down from Admin. * Ok * I think you would be good at it (sigh) * Why are you against it * Whosawhatsis, why are you against it * we are forming too much bureaucracy while the number of contributing users is shrinking * at this rate, we'll have more jobs than people to fill them * I see the concern, and I agree that we may have to slow the growth of the board to reflect the actual population. * If we increase the population wo/ a way of arbitration, things are bound to come up * Thats why only 3 would fill the first job * Agreed. They come up now, and there is no "neutral" body to go to. Staff doesn't count, mostly because they are too busy. * So, let's focus on outreach this last month before the elections (hopefully if it passes) * I may not be so active, I have to be a real judge in GA * My only real concern with the policy is the limit to how long someone can serve on the board. I think if someone gains a lot of experience in the rules, policies and history of the site, we should take advantage of that experience. * Well, after, i think it's four terms, with a 2/3 vote, we can allow the person to run more times * The reason for that is what if the person abuses his power * Four terms is two years * If someone abuses the power, there should be a way to call them on it. * Hense, the way to expel them * Each seat is up once a year. * at least the way I did the sequencing. * So four terms is four years, who would do it for five? * I understand what you say, but if a person is really that popular, 2/3 would be easy to get * test * testing * blue * . * Chadlupkes, any other internet sites you work with? * Alright then * Anyone still here? * yeah * Ok' * busy making an edit. * I'm VERY busy online. * So why do you oppose it, when only three seats to fill? * So why do you oppose it, when only three seats to fill? * It's possible that growth every six months may be too fast. * Whether that works or not will depend on how successful our outreach efforts are. * When did this wikia start anyway? * July 4th * it's been here for only like 5 months, and we already are doing good (for a political wikia) * Outreach will increase when our focus is shifted away from policy after policy * A small number of people have done the majority of the work. * I certainly agree with that. * So, once the policy stuff is dealt with, we focus on the actual stuff and outreach * there was a boom when it made the front page of digg, but participation has been dropping pretty steadily since then * Digg? what is that? * http://digg.com/ * thanks * it's a news site where users vote for articles to determine whether they appear on the front page * k * Maybe we should increase it through Wikipedia * I was once involved with a new "city" called tirben, it stopped after the buzz stopped * We need enough people to chat about it there * I certainly can get the Esperanza side buzzing * That's discouraged by the Wikipedia community. * Yet, half the stuff in Esperanza are talks about games, etc. * And it's discouraged rather strongly. They don't like Wikia for some reason, probably due to rivalry. * Isn't it part of the Wikipedia company? * No, it's a separate company. * With support from Jimbo? * Jimbo started it as a separate project. * Ok, gotta go * See ya'll later * k * I'll save this chat. * Wikizach has quit IRC (Remote closed the connection�) Arbitration Board Discussion